It has come up in other discussions multiple times just what the exact nature of the Amulet is. I had hoped to keep it up to authorial fiat, but it seems that isn't going to work with some of the ideas various people have.

The first question is: what does the Amulet look and sound like?

This leads into the second question: does the Amulet lie? The entire premise of the story is that the Amulet manipulates its potential wearers. But are these deceptions or are they sincere (from the Amulet's point of view)?

And, perhaps most importantly: is the Amulet sentient? Does it have free will? Is it capital-E Evil? Does it even operate on a recognizable morality? And if it is one or more of these things, then what made it that way, and why? Is it a victim, or a tool, or something else?

Obviously, this is a lot of questions. I don't want everyone to answer any or all of them in particular, I just want people to present their concept of what the Amulet is. Then perhaps, we can come to a consensus about what is should be and will be in the chapters.

Here's my take (and remember, just because I started this project along doesn't make my opinion any more or less valid than anyone else's);

Personally, I dislike the idea of the Amulet having a set appearance. One idea I proposed while editing TD's chapter was that the Amulet was a chameleon, changing the nature and style of its temptations to fit its targets. Why shouldn't that also apply to its appearance? Perhaps isntead of appearing as a gray alicorn (as it did in TD's chapter), it could be a doppelganger of Celestia, or of Cadance, or of Starswirl the Bearded. This is the tack I had planned to take in my Luna chapter. The Amulet speaks through an illusory Nightmare Moon. This would also open up the ability to contrast the Amulet and its disguise: how similar or different is it to Celestia or Nightmare Moon or Starswirl, and in what ways?

As for its nature, I'll admit I didn't think that far ahead. That's why in my Cadance chapter, the Amulet only appears as itself. It is an inanimate object, and I left it to the reader to determine its nature.

This ties into one of my secrets to great writing. Essentially, the key is to make things vague enough that readers can think the story is better than it is. Then take all the credit for it afterward. But we as authors still need to have some idea of what we are doing, so the story can appear to be consistent.

5917129
I'lll just put down what my ideas for the amulet are.

My initial idea for the story was that the amulet could appear as any normal stallion with no clear features, or simply a pair of eyes out of a dark alleyway. It would then lure in passers-byes with the promise of power, fortune, health, anything they might desire.

Basically no discernable form, just a magical presence with a voice that would then present the amulet as an ordinary object.

As for it's nature, I just see it an enchanted object, possibly created by some powerful mage long ago. It's not necessarily sentient, but rather just carrying out its purposes -- which is to seek out and corrupt ponies, and feed off of their internal magical potential to greater its own strength. The illusion of sentience just comes from the way it works, and manipulates the minds of those around it.

Why it would've been made to act in such a way is up to interpretation -- maybe they just wanted it to gain power, but the corrupting influence is a natural outcome from the dark magics involved. <insert long schpeel about good mage forced to madness by his dark, yet noble work>

What does the Amulet look and sound like?

I think it should change depending on the pony in question. I don't think it should mirror each pony, because it would make more sense to change itself to whatever they would find appealing. Twilight responds well to authority figures, so it took the form of a tall, intelligent Unicorn. for Rainbow Dash, it's a little shorter than her, a pegasus, and presents itself as a pony who needs to be saved.

Is the Amulet sentient?

As a Star Trek/Doctor Who fan, I'm really in favor of this. My favorite trope is the Kirk Summation. I like the idea that nothing is 'above' good and evil, and I think it'd be cool to see it think of itself as beyond such concepts before having that thrown in its face.

Does the Amulet lie?

If it does, it'll be a lot easier to keep it characterization consistent.

I like the concept for the chameleon amulet. This is a defense mechanism that allows the amulet to achieve what I think its original purpose was.

As for it's original purpose... The amulet seems to have been created with the intent to give the wielder power. I think the original design intent was to make the wielder "the most powerful." If it attained limited sentience, then it may have decided that it could only fulfill it's design requirement by having individuals use it to bypass their maximum potential and then siphoning off of that peak level of power to raise its own peak level of ability, which thus allows it to increase their maximum again.

When it uses deception on the wearer, I think it is not inherently evil in nature. When it meets a mind that wants the power, it doesn't immediately need deception at all to achieve its programmed purpose. The deception is possibly something that was developed as a way to cause the user to keep increasing their limits, and thus increase it's own level of power. With Trixie, we see it give her nudges so that she keeps using more and more powerful magic, raising both of their powers in the process.

The outright deception we see against Cadence in your chapter is something of a self preservation mechanism. It may be very aware of its own limitations and its own method of destruction. Since its own destruction would prevent it from accomplishing its design goal, it will go to lengths to deceive in order to prevent that from happening.

But... it has not met many, if any, who have outright denied its power. So it only knows how to communicate with promises of power. This leads to an appearance of being evil, since it tempts with evil things to overcome and because it keeps prompting the user to increase their own abilities with ever increasing displays of power. But it is no more evil than a capacitor that drains energy from a battery.

Anywho, that's just my idea on it. It was made by some one (note I did not say "somepony" I think that another race could have been responsible) who wanted the powers of the Alicorns, and made the amulet to accomplish that goal. They didn't understand the issues with literal commands being misinterpreted, and thus the Amulet was born.

Given that these so far occur in mind-scapes, I lean towards 'It is what it needs to be to tempt' in any given scenario; hence in TD's case it could actually take on a 'persona', but in the Cadance chapter it was largely just a bit of jewelry.

As for appearance - well, in the real world I lean towards it looking like it did in-show.

5917129 I think, in the context of the story, the Amulet is sentient. It's aware of its own life, and I think it'd be interesting to see it become gradually more aware of the possibility of its own demise as the story progresses. Like, as the Amulet gets weaker and weaker it starts to lose confidence and become more pony-like as the thought occurs to it that it might die soon. Morbid, but that's always been in the back of my mind with regards to the Amulet as a character. It goes through a kind of arc, which makes sense because aside from maybe Twilight it's the only major recurring character throughout all these different scenarios.

So, ya know, the order of the chapters is important. I also think the Amulet isn't evil so much as lacking in empathy, at least for much of the story. It has needs, and it only really cares about those needs, but in the latter stages of its arc it becomes more willing to see the perspectives of the ponies it's trying to manipulate. Does that mean the Amulet will eventually turn good? Will it die after all? I don't know.

As for the origin of the Amulet, I have a few ideas in mind, but I think it can be like a Joker situation where the Amulet gives a different origin story, depending on who it's with and what it's trying to accomplish. I do, however, think we can build up a greater implication as to where the Amulet came from, and to keep things vague for now I have no doubt that it's a very old object that knows a lot of history.

5918405 I think that's a fair point: if this is supposed to be a series of character pieces, then the Amulet needn't really have a character or arc. As 5920525 pointed out, though, the Amulet is the only recurring character. Giving it an arc allows for contrasts and comparisons with the other characters.

While giving the Amulet its own sub-plot may not be mutually exclusive with focusing on the characters confronting it, it may be too difficult to do in a collaborative project. Perhaps if this were a single author story it would be easier to coordinate, but it seems too logistically difficult.

5918484 I meant 'appearance' as in 'the appearance it takes on in mindscapes'. Obviously in real life (...of the pony world), there's no reason for it to look different from the show.

Hence why I put forth the idea that it only ever appears as other ponies. After all, if the Amulet is 'just' an amulet, then it wouldn't have any pony-sona or anything.

5926478 Ah, yea, that makes sense!

5921787 So if the Amulet is like the One Ring--it makes promises of power and lies in service to a goal--then what is that goal? We can be reasonably sure that it isn't to draw itself back to a given individual (it's Sauron analogue), since Trixie holes herself up in Ponyville when wearing it.

5927916 Sombra !?

5917129

5917252

5917568

5926943

Would it be okay if we had the Amulet grow annoyed whenever somepony mentions that it turns ponies evil? I had this idea that it blames other ponies for their own actions and doesn’t admit to itself that it’s own fear is corrupting its bearers.

5976276 Well, that raises some questions. If the Amulet is Obliviously Evil--if it it thinks what it is doing is good--then how does this fall in line with its nature as The Corrupter?

That requires an answer that we couldn’t find a consensus for: what are the Amulet’s goals? If it is sentient, how does it justify its actions to itself?

Here’s a thought. What if the Amulet doesn’t know why it does the things it does? What if it has existed for so long, coerced and corrupted so many ponies, that it has forgotten the reason for its own existence?

This would justify such a reaction. After all, if it goes around corrupting ponies, but doesn’t know why, then it would make sense for it to be offended at the idea that it is evil. Perhaps this is where the conflict comes from; if it doesn’t know whats its purpose is, and it cannot justify its actions, then what is the point of doing those actions in the first place?

And of course, this also opens room for drama. If it can’t reconcile those discrepancies, what would it do? Would it try to change, or would it actively choose to stay the same?

5977080

This would justify such a reaction. After all, if it goes around corrupting ponies, but doesn’t know why, then it would make sense for it to be offended at the idea that it is evil. Perhaps this is where the conflict comes from; if it doesn’t know whats its purpose is, and it cannot justify its actions, then what is the point of doing those actions in the first place?

Here’s what I was thinking: (and a large portion of this was thought of just now)
The Amulet was built to protect ponies, like it told Twilight.
Bad things happen when someone wheres it.
It doesn’t want to blame itself, so it blames it’s wearer. Power corrupts, so increasing the powers of others makes them crazy.
Except power doesn’t corrupt, it exposes corruption. It’s scared of what ponies can do with it’s power, scared of its own helplessness, and try’s to reign its bearer in.
And of course, its paranoia and desire for control are what end up driving ponies insane. And it’ll keep doing that, because it won’t let go and trust anypony.

As far as its status as the corrupter; I’m not sure how that fits in. If its a sapient being and can’t move under its own power, maybe its afraid of being left alone for all eternity?

5977669 So the way I read that is, the Amulet tempts and tests ponies as a defense mechanism? I suppose it makes sense in some ways, but in others it seems off. If the Amulet is tempting ponies to test them, then that would mean that whomever gets tempted by it is actually the least qualified to wield it.

That motivation makes the Amulet’s reasoning backwards. And characters with backwards reasoning can make for menacing and complex villains, yes. But I don’t think it makes sense in this case. It makes the Amulet come off as stupid or insane, which doesn’t work if we’re trying to create some level of sympathy for it.

I still think that my previous idea, the Amulet being a semi-amnesiac, would be an easier motivation to explore (although I also came up with that as I was typing).

5978277
Okay, what do we need to happen?

Pinkie creates an illusion inside her head where the Amulet wins.
The real Amulet is stuck in there.
It’s a two-part chapter, the first part ends on Fake!Pinkie choosing the Amulet, thereby tricking the real Amulet and the audience into thinking that it’s won.
The Amulet can do whatever it wants, and it ends up being the same kind of evil that its bearers are, and conquers Pinkie's illusion of Equestria. Or something similar.
Pinkie pops up, surprising the Amulet and the Audience, and reveals the deception.
The Amulet is offered a choice: accept Pinkie’s offer of friendship, or keep doing what its been doing.
It refuses.

What could best facilitate this?

5978776 I do like the idea of Pinkie creating a complicated counter-illusion (since we know from the show she basically has a photographic memory). That said, it seems like a lot of steps. An overly-convoluted plot will make the story too hard to follow.

What if Pinkie puts the Amulet on a mannequin or something (in a mindscape or in real life [...of the pony world]). Then she says the Amulet is free to do whatever it wants, and it chooses to do something ‘evil’. But before it can follow through on this, Pinkie reveals that the mannequin doesn’t channel magic the same way a pony host would. So the Amulet can move around and stuff, but it can’t use any of its powers.

In part 2, she takes the Amulet on a trip to do something mundane, like go to a party or watch clouds or something. (This is Pinkie Pie, after all.) Afterwards, she offers the Amulet the choice again; continue corrupting ponies or try living a mundane life. It chooses the former, and the climax of the chapter is Pinkie asking it ‘why?’

It’s answer (or lack of one) and Pinkie’s reaction, would be a strong note to end the chapter on. Pinkie always struck me as the type of pony who Cannot Comprehend Evil, and the conversation that ensues would be a good character moment for both the Amulet and Pinkie Pie.

If the chapter is near the end, it would make a good segue into my Luna chapter, since that was going to be about redemption. It might also be a good thematic tie-in to the Sweetie Belle/Scootaloo chapter, depending how that goes.

5979455
Let me back up a little.
Power doesn’t corrupt, in my mind. It exposes corruption. If someone can act free of consequence, then they’ll do the things they want to do, which in turn tends to lead them to making notably bad decisions.
The Amulet doesn’t believe that,, so Pinkie proves to the Amulet that it isn’t better than the ponies it takes. It might not even think taking them as corruption- if it doesn’t have a bearer, it dies, so it’ll do anything to persuade ponies to bear it. Pinkies illusion proves to it that it’s the problem, and therefore it’s the one that needs to change.
Except it can’t accept that, and freaks out and refuses.

I’m not super fond of ‘good can’t comprehend evil’ because I like proving (maybe driving home a little to much) that good is better than evil. I’m not saying that makes my idea better, its just where I am. By the same token, I do tend to gravitate towards more complicated ideas because I enjoy more clever stories like Sherlock and Steve Moffatt’s Doctor Who. If still think I should go simple, I’ll roll with it.

5979455
I think its worth noting that, when I was pitching this, the hook of this chapter is that it’s the opposite of the other chapters. Normally, each chapter follows a basic pattern:

Somepony is put inside a stressful situation. They are offered a chance to compromise their values to get out of it. They refuse, and thereby grow as a person.

The Amulet, meanwhile is given everything it thinks it wants. It realizes the futility/hypocrisy of its actions, and is offered a chance to improve, but is unable to bring itself to accept.

The biggest question is why doesn’t it accept. The whole point of Pinkie’s vision, whichever form it takes, is allowing evil to comprehend good. So if it knows what the right thing to do, why wouldn’t it do it? Could it fear retaliation? Could it be stuck evil because it’s programmer didn’t understand good, thereby making the Amulet a victim and turning the story into a tragedy?

What did the Amulet and Luna talk about again?

5980381I So to you, it’s not a matter of Power Corrupts, it’s that power exposes What You Are In The Dark?

Well of course good is (supposed to be) better than evil. It’s right there in the names. And in fiction particularly, which deals with abstraction as a rule, good is better than evil by default. It’s a question of what forms your good and evil take.

I don’t have any objection to complexity. But a complicated story needs to have its complexity introduced by degrees. I had trouble following your outline, and that is not a good sign for an eight-sentence summary. The mechanics also raise a lot of questions (if Pinkie chooses a fake Amulet, then puts it on, how does that it give it the freedom to do what it wants? And why doesn’t it realize the difference between illusion and reality?).

If you look at something like Sherlock or Stephen Moffat’s Jekyll , then yes, they are complicated. But they also intentionally hide a lot of things from the audience until they become relevant. They can get away with more because they aren’t giving the full picture until it’s convenient. That is a lot harder to pull off in prose fiction, because the way you give information to the reader is very different than in television.

It is ultimately your chapter, and I am merely providing my opinion. But I do think that you can cut away some elements (or replace them with something that is more intuitive) and still have a similar idea that is easier to write and explain.

5980469 I was waiting to write the Luna chapter until more people had completed theirs. But I think that the main idea is the Amulet appears as Nightmare Moon, and it tries to offer Luna redemption. But Luna--knowing that she is talking to the Amulet--says that no one can give her forgiveness for the things she’s done except herself--she learned that a long time ago. And depending on what the Amulet does in previous chapters, she may point out that it is the least qualified to redeem her, given its powers and modus operandi.

It is, however, still tentative. I may change things up, because as-is it’s a retread of a lot of the ideas in the If You Came to Conquer series

5980793

So to you, it’s not a matter ofPower Corrupts, it’s that power exposesWhat You Are In The Dark?

That is exactly what it is! Thanks!

I don’t have any objection to complexity. But a complicated story needs to have its complexity introduced by degrees. I had trouble following your outline, and that is not a good sign for an eight-sentence summary. The mechanics also raise a lot of questions (if Pinkie chooses a fake Amulet, then puts it on, how does that it give it the freedom to do what it wants? And why doesn’t it realize the difference between illusion and reality?).

I think I just did a poor job explaining. I’m know for that. Can I try one more time?

-Pinkie is tempted by the Amulet, like normal. The only difference this time is that Pinkie puts the Amulet on.
-We get a chapter of the Amulet being evil. (This is the only wobbly bit; I’m not sure what evil stuff the Amulet should be specifically doing. It can do basically anything, because it’s supercharging pinkie’s magic to Alicorn-tier levels. It will also be made more difficult because I’ll need to have her act less like Pinkie and more like the Amulet as it goes on.)
-Twilight is the one putting the most effort into stopping her, and eventually her plans fail and the Amulet captures her.
-Twilight gives a Winger Speech, and the Amulet does some stereotypical thing, like saying “Pinkie’s not here right now!”
-And then Twilight turns into Pinkie, and we savor the looks on the Amulet and the audience face.
-Pinkie then stops and explains exactly what happened. The Amulet enters people’s minds to create illusions, and Pinkie’s brain is just more powerful than it. (the only thing that might be hard to swallow, maybe it could be because of her Wrong Context Magic?)
Pinkie tells the Amulet that every choice it made was a choice it made, not her.
-The Amulet reacts to this.

And depending on what the Amulet does in previous chapters, she may point out that it is the least qualified to redeem her, given its powers and modus operandi.

We could use it to make the Amulet a more tragic figure. Perhaps it was programmed to possess ponies, so it has the mechanical knowledge of how such things work, but it doesn’t have an intuitive understanding. It honestly can’t change itself, and then the whole story becomes a tragedy.

5981120 You’re thinking more of a "I Know You're in There Somewhere" Fight ; Jeff usually gave a Rousing Speech.

Firstly, I agree that making Pinkie Pie explicitly more powerful than it is awkward (although it’s more justifiable if it’s the third to last chapter). But even if she just has a photographic memory, to what degree is it believable for her to manipulate the Amulet? That’s why I kind of like the idea of just having her be upfront with it.

Secondly, allowing the Amulet to make the choice itself makes a thematic counterpoint to all the other chapters. If Pinkie tries to trick it with an illusion, then she’s using the same exact methods as the Amulet, and that makes her Not So Different. Whereas if she offers it a choice/scenario with no deceit of any kind, then its failure is all its own doing. She is also proving that good is better than evil, because she doesn’t need to resort to trickery like the Amulet does, in order to prove her point.

If you want your chapter to showcase good triumphing over evil, then i do think Pinkie Pie is a great pony for that. I always thought of her as believing in the inherent goodness of others. But I think subterfuge is beyond her, and it clashes thematically with the ideas you are trying to present.

Picture something like this; maybe she does the mannequin thing I mentioned earlier, except there’s no illusion or trickery involved. She just takes the Amulet and offers it freedom without the use of its magic. And then when she takes it to do something, it goes off to try to tempt somepony. Not only is it different structurally from all the other chapters, but it is also the opposite thematically as well.

5981252
I concede that my original pitch doesn't really fit Pinkie Pie that well. I'll shelve it and use it for something later, maybe Doctor Who?

The only thing about the mannequin is that if they can let it possess something like that, there's no reason not to let it do that and then stick it in an insane asylum. A real one that helps people, not like Arkham. I guess an argument could be made that it's to dangerous to keep, but that moral quandary is kinda a big deal to.

Perhaps Pinkie could simply overturn any illusion it makes, stalemating it? She's intelligent, driven, and most importantly insane, and we already know its possible to subvert temptations from Derpy's chapter. Then the two of them have a real conversation.